“Fourth Circuit judges quibble over LGBTQ-inclusive books for Maryland elementary schoolers; Parents claim that forcing their kids to read books that promote tolerance of LGBTQ people violates their religious rights”: Joe Dodson of Courthouse News Service has this report on a case argued today before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Update: You can access the oral argument audio via this link.

“Switchblade Ban Stymies Judges Grappling With Right to Bear Arms; Court debates whether weapon ban violates Second Amendment; State argues knives aren’t arms, lack constitutional protection”: Allie Reed of Bloomberg Law has this report.

And Thomas F. Harrison of Courthouse News Service reports that “Massachusetts court stumped as to whether Second Amendment protects switchblades; The justices confessed confusion over how the Wild West — and West Side Story — should fit into its constitutional analysis.”

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has posted the video of yesterday’s oral argument on YouTube at this link.

“Second Circuit sends fight against NY concealed carry training back to starting gate; Whether a civil rights attorney seeking to a concealed-carry permit can dodge training requirements while he fights said requirements depends on whether he can even bring the case at all”: Nika Schoonover of Courthouse News Service has this report on a Summary Order that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued last month.

“Ruling striking down Maryland handgun law on hold while governor appeals”: Rachel Weiner of The Washington Post has this report.

“Justices Seem Skeptical of Challenge to Trump-Era Tax Provision; The Supreme Court’s liberal wing and more moderate conservatives seemed to be searching for a way toward a limited ruling on a tax law that affects foreign profits of American companies”: Abbie VanSickle of The New York Times has this report.

Ann E. Marimow and Julie Zauzmer Weil of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court seems inclined to narrowly uphold Trump tax provision.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court weighs limits on Congress’ power to tax corporate wealth.”

Jess Bravin and Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Wary of Remaking Income Tax; Justices hearing arguments over whether unrealized income could be taxed appear to shy away from broad ruling.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court raises concerns over tax law, how to interpret income; Justices grapple with $15,000 tax penalty dispute, could upend part of 2017 tax reform law.”

Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service reports that “Supreme Court sees path to uphold Trump tax law without commenting on wealth tax; The justices looked for an even-keeled ruling in a case that could leave the government out trillions in tax revenue.”

And at his Substack site, Chris Geidner has a post titled “The Moores’ big tax case quickly deflated once the Supreme Court heard it; Justice Sam Alito, who refused to recuse himself from hearing the case, was virtually alone with Justice Neil Gorsuch in advancing the extreme claims on Tuesday.”

“Texas Woman Asks Court to Allow Her Abortion; A woman who is 20 weeks pregnant, and whose fetus has been diagnosed with a deadly condition, is suing for an abortion under a medical exception to the state’s bans”: J. David Goodman of The New York Times has this report.

Eleanor Klibanoff of The Texas Tribune reports that “Texas woman asks judge to let her terminate pregnancy after lethal fetal diagnosis; In an emergency request, the Center for Reproductive Rights is asking a judge to allow Kate Cox to terminate her pregnancy after she received a lethal fetal diagnosis.”

And Kirk McDaniel of Courthouse News Service reports that “Texas woman brings challenge against medical exception to state’s abortion bans; After being denied an abortion to end a nonviable pregnancy, Kate Cox wants a Texas court to step in and allow her to get the procedure.”

“In its new ‘Hellholes’ report, tort reform group says forum shopping is real”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Reuters has this post, which mentions a decision the Pa. Supreme Court issued on the day before Thanksgiving in a case in which I serve as appellate counsel for plaintiffs.

“Sandra Day O’Connor Told a Truth About Marriage That Few Others Dared To”: Patti Davis has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Jones Day Picks Up 8 More US Supreme Court Clerks; The firm recruited another group of former clerks who worked with Republican-nominated judges on the U.S. Supreme Court”: Sarah Tincher-Numbers of The National Law Journal has this report.

“The murky waters where state law and federal maritime law converge; The U.S. Supreme Court should seize the opportunity to adopt the Restatement with respect to maritime contracts”: A little over a month ago, Nicholas J. Neidzwski had this essay in The Daily Journal of California.

“Dan Markel murder: Phones seized during search of Donna and Harvey Adelson’s Miami condo.” Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“Most of Biden’s appointed judges to date are women, racial or ethnic minorities — a first for any president”: John Gramlich of Pew Research Center has this report.

“US Supreme Court Suggests Support for 2017 Tax on Foreign Earnings”: Greg Stohr and Michael Rapoport of Bloomberg News have this report.

“Rite Aid, Asbestos Cases Hinge on Supreme Court Purdue Ruling”: James Nani and Alex Wolf of Bloomberg Law have this report.

“Supreme Court Dismisses Disability Activist’s Case as Moot; The activist, Deborah Laufer, had sued hundreds of hotels as a ‘tester,’ having no intention of booking a stay, accusing them of inadequate disclosures about whether rooms were accessible”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes and Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court dismisses case of hotel discrimination tester, says it’s moot.”

John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court dismisses case dealing with disability ‘testers.’”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court dismisses woman’s case against hotels over violating Americans With Disabilities Act.”

Lawrence Hurley of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court dodges ruling in disability rights case; The case could have curbed efforts by disability rights activists to ensure that hotels and other places accessible to the public comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

Lydia Wheeler of Bloomberg Law reports that “Supreme Court Tosses Fight Over Disability ‘Tester’ Suit.”

And Megan Butler and Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service report that “Supreme Court tosses disability tester case; The justices declined to rule on a key enforcement mechanism for the Americans with Disabilities Act after the case was voluntarily withdrawn.”

“The Major Questions Doctrine on Opioids”: Michael C. Dorf has this post at his blog, “Dorf on Law.”

Access online today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in an argued case: Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered the opinion of the Court in Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, No. 22-429. Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson issued opinions concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument audio and transcript.

“Supreme Court hears a case that experts say could wreak havoc on the tax code”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“The Supreme Court Takes On Yet Another Made-Up Controversy; The issue teed up in Moore v. United States may be so intellectually stimulating that nobody seems to have noticed that the case has been fundamentally misframed”: Law professor Conor Clarke has this essay online at The Atlantic.